Next message: Geoffrey M. Clemm: "Re: checkout-fork"
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 16:44:30 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <200008252044.QAA05138@tantalum.atria.com>
From: "Geoffrey M. Clemm" <geoffrey.clemm@rational.com>
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Subject: Re: DAV:resourcetype for version resources
This omission was intentional.
A "version" resource, a "version selector" resource, and a
"working" resource are all intended to look to clients (especially
versioning unaware clients) as much as possible like the
resource before it was put under version control. In particular,
there should be nothing surprising in the DAV:resourcetype
property.
There is a proposal to place multiple elements in the
DAV:resourcetype property value, but we need to first make
sure that this will not break widely deployed WebDAV
implementations (such as Office 2000).
If a client wants to know whether a resource is a version,
a version selector, or a working resource, it can check for
the existence of a DAV:version, DAV:target, and DAV:checked-out
property, respectively.
Probably some words to this effect should be added to the
protocol document.
Cheers,
Geoff
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 21:04:43 -0700
From: Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org>
I've found that a DAv:resourcetype is not defined for version resource.
Hmm. Same goes for version selectors and working resources.
It *is* defined for activities, workspaces, and baselines.
My thoughts:
*) version resource: should be DAV:version
*) version selector: should look like a "normal" resource, so it does not
have a special resource type
*) working resource: should be DAV:working
I seem to recall somewhere that have "-resource" on the end of the resource
type is redundant, so I dropped them. I'm ambivalent on whether they should
be there.
Cheers,
-g
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/